.
The entire world is going to hell in a hand basket, our country is changing, for the worst, and every country in the world wants us to pay them to like us. So then why do I care about GAYS in the military?
.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell is back in the news. And here's a hint, most of the troops not only KNOW who IS and is NOT gay, and they don 't care!!
.
This is not a new problem, and it's not going to go away by shining light on it. I have / had an uncle whom left my aunt for a gay lifestyle in Than Franthithco, There were gay guys, and gay girls at every duty station I ever hit. One of the "guys" my son the Marine Combat Engineer was with in Iraq, was gay. My older son is career Navy. He has talked extensively about the "gay community" inside the Navy.
.
Most people want to work with someone who does their job. I'd rather work with, or hire, a gay person who does their job, than a straight idiot who won't work. What good is a straight person, as an employee or military member, if their only attribute is BEING straight?
.
IMHO, they are bringing this up is a diversion. From what I don't know. Or it's an attempt to show how rigid and unloving the Right is "really".
.
Personally, my take on this always was always, "...so long as I don't have to see gay sex at Morning Quarters, on the flight deck, in the shower, or in the chow line, I....don't....care".
.
It's your turn, gofer it
.
.
Schteveo
5 comments:
I have to agree with you Steve. They are now embeded in every part of our society, (including the NYPD) something i can accept while still not condoning their lifestyle. What i can not accept is using the courts and the govt. to create a special class for them with laws, protections, (hate crime laws) and special treatment, above and beyond those afforded the rest of us.
Example:
http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/new_ny_law
_lets_unmarried_adults_VbllUoqqS35ophVr5tEnwL
Spider,
but the "Average Guy" gay person, is NOT a fist pumping, bull horn screaming, activist. It's not happening any more than EVERY white person who is not liberal is a racist or Tea Party member.
I'm with you, though on the constant legal push.
I don't want to know what heterosexuals do behind closed doors. But you never hear anyone non-gay say, "...but BECAUSE I'm not gay I should get special treatment". The flip side pisses me off. AND, I don't care who you sleep with or what you smoke...I'd rather work with a openly gay, flaming, daily cross dresser who smokes a bowl of mary jane every night and shows up for work on time and works with me. The hetero, water cooler gang, brown nosing, Bible quoters are WAY more involved in societal collapse.
Takers are always bad for society, regardless of where or when and their religious or (supposed) political views.
(ask the water cooler gang how they vote, at least half of them vote to the right, but live to the left)
On one level I completely agree. If they can work and do their job and I don't have to hear about it....who cares. And that works just fine in garrison.
In a combat zone, it only plays to special privelage. In combat zones, not even husbands and wives are permitted conjugal visits. There are more couples serving in the same unit these days than anyone thought was possible years ago. And they DO NOT GET TO LIVE TOGETHER. It is bad for moral for some people to be able to relieve stress through physical interaction while denying it to others.
We make special accomodations by providing quarters for females, and quarters for males. There is no special accomodation. They go down the list, you two here, you two there, etc. You don't get a choice of who you bunk with.
If we repeal DADT we now have the problem (is it psychological, yes) of knowing that we are housing personel of different sexes together. There is no way to make it equitable.
Do we house gay men with women? The women might have a problem with that. Why can't we house straight men with the women or force the issue either way? There may be women who would be bunked with a man who is uncomfortable having her see him get undressed.
The biggest issue is truly logistical. There is no issue related to race difference and gays, there is no issue with gender differences, the issue is that there is a grey area that can not be equitably addressed.
The issue that 25+ developed countries permit it doesn't take into account that all of those countries have mandatory conscription. They are simply eliminating a free pass out.
Everytime that I hear that some of the greatest warriors in history (greek & roman) were gay or at least bi, my thought is.....and how did that work out for them? Last time I checked, even if they were not allies, they wouldn't be much of a threat to anybody else in the world.
On one level I completely agree. If they can work and do their job and I don't have to hear about it....who cares. And that works just fine in garrison.
In a combat zone, it only plays to special privelage. In combat zones, not even husbands and wives are permitted conjugal visits. There are more couples serving in the same unit these days than anyone thought was possible years ago. And they DO NOT GET TO LIVE TOGETHER. It is bad for moral for some people to be able to relieve stress through physical interaction while denying it to others.
We make special accomodations by providing quarters for females, and quarters for males. There is no special accomodation. They go down the list, you two here, you two there, etc. You don't get a choice of who you bunk with.
If we repeal DADT we now have the problem (is it psychological, yes) of knowing that we are housing personel of different sexes together. There is no way to make it equitable.
Do we house gay men with women? The women might have a problem with that. Why can't we house straight men with the women or force the issue either way? There may be women who would be bunked with a man who is uncomfortable having her see him get undressed.
The biggest issue is truly logistical. There is no issue related to race difference and gays, there is no issue with gender differences, the issue is that there is a grey area that can not be equitably addressed.
The issue that 25+ developed countries permit it doesn't take into account that all of those countries have mandatory conscription. They are simply eliminating a free pass out.
Everytime that I hear that some of the greatest warriors in history (greek & roman) were gay or at least bi, my thought is.....and how did that work out for them? Last time I checked, even if they were not allies, they wouldn't be much of a threat to anybody else in the world.
I love it when my computer screws up and posts twice.....twice the enjoyment of reading it I guess.
Post a Comment